On June 17, the Supreme Court ruled that reverse payment settlements between brand name and generic drug manufacturers were not presumptively unlawful, but were subject to scrutiny under the “rule of reason.” This holding overruled the Eleventh Circuit’s dismissal of the case and resolved a circuit split.

Written by Kassity Liu Edited by Andrew Segna Editorial Policy Social media has taken our society by storm. From Facebook to Twitter to LinkedIn, social media has provided individuals with newer and faster ways to communicate with one another. In 2011, eBizMBA estimated that 700 million unique users visited Facebook per month, 200 million users visited Twitter, and 100 million users visited LinkedIn. These statistics are staggering. The entire population of the United States, as reported by the U.S. Census ... Read More...

Written by Mehdi Eddebbarh & Jack Burns Edited by Albert Wang Editorial Policy I. Introduction Patent law strives to stimulate innovation by awarding inventors a temporary monopoly over patented inventions. Antitrust law seeks to ensure efficient competition, in part by restricting monopolistic behavior. Perhaps the most scrutinized area of intersection between patent law and antitrust law is the proper treatment of “reverse payments,” also referred to as “pay-for-delay” settlements. Arkansas Carpenters Health and Welfare Fund v. Bayer AG, 625 F.3d ... Read More...